Talk:Proposed features/Key:natural protection

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Ich würde die Werte kürzen:

Values

Key Value Element Comment Rendering Photo
natural_protection monument Area Way Node A single nature object like a tree, a small lake or a very small area that is valuable.
Naturalmonument.jpg
natural_protection area Area An area where human activity is very restricted
natural_protection landscape Area An area where human activity is restricted, but less than natural protection area
natural_protection water Area An area where human activity that can endanger water ressources is prohibited

Begründung:

  • natural_protection=Monument - offensichtlich ist das "Monument" naturbezogen, Redundanz unnötig
  • natural_protection=area - "area" ist auf natural_protection bezogen, Redundanz unnötig
  • natural_protection=landscape - "landscape" ist immer mehr als nur ein Punkt, also logischerweise ein Gebiet, "area" muss nicht zusätzöich erwähnt werden. Wenn nicht weitere landscape-Werte benutzt werden, kann man das "conservation weglassen. Ich kenne die verschiedenen Schutzgrade nicht, man sollte evtl landscape_bisschen_gechützt, landscape_mehr_geschützt und landscape_total_geschützt definieren, möglichst mit maximal zwei Worten
  • Die Ausführungen zu landscape gelten ebenso für "water".

Request for additional key "zone" (or similarly)

In Germany a water protection area is divided in different zones with the values I, II and III (for 1 up to 3). Sometimes, zone III is further divided in IIIa and IIIb. In the zones, different restrictions are defined. -- Okilimu

Please specify

Please, specify what means that "An area where human activity is very restricted". Can the humans construct houses? What types of activity is allowed? I'm missing something like:

Template:Tag:natural protection:allow for allowing construction for example and

Template:Tag:natural protection:disallow for not allowing construction.

The same for haunting...

For the other hand, I miss a field like official_type for differentiate different types of natural protection that is defined legally. For example, see this (in catalan) (use google translate) for defining ANEI as a type of natural protection area in Balearic Island, in Spain. So, I suggest to add a tags like:

Template:Tag:natural protection:official type

Template:Tag:natural protection:operator --> the organization competent for declaring one area of protection.

Template:Tag:natural protection:jurisdiction--> the zone in which the legal classication is valid. In my example, the ANEI type of protection is only defined in Balearic Island, and not for other regions of Spain which have different legal types of protection,


Regards, --Xan 19:28, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

New proposal

Hi,

I study your proposal and I think it's too much specific. I want to make an alternative proposal:

Tag Value Mean
natural_protection yes/no Means if there is a protection over an area. (for example a landuse=wood). This is the main value. The default is no.
type natural_reserve, landscape_reserve, national_park, user_defined. The type of the natural protection that there is in this area: natural park, etc. The importance of user_defined is very high because natural_protection is contry-specific (there are much types of natural protection types in Spain that there aren't in UK and inversely).
allow:tag yes/no allow activity in the area which tag defines
restrict:tag yes/no restrict activity in the area which tag defines
ban:tag yes/no ban activity in the area which tag defines
cares_of user defined What is specially what is protected in its area (birds, fish, animals, vegetation)

Useful combinations

With name=* (the name of area), operator=* (what has the competence for declaring that area is natural protected; attention: not confusing with the propierty of the land: the land could be private but be natural protected area), access=* (specially if motor vehicles has access to it)


Examples

For example, in Spain we have an ANEI (Natural Area of Special Interest) in which we could not make fire and the Public Administration does not allow to make buildings. (see wikipedia (catalan) and wikipedia (english)) We tag as

  • natural_protection=yes
  • type=ANEI
  • ban:fire=yes
  • ban:building=yes

For the other, hand in European Union, we have ZEPA. We tag it as:

  • natural_protection=yes
  • type=ZEPA
  • cares_of=birds
  • ban:hunting:birds=yes

Predefined Allow/Restricts/Ban tags

We could have usually predefined tags. I think for example in these:

Tag Value Mean
allow/restrict/ban:fire yes/no allow, restrict or ban making fire in the area
allow/restrict/ban:fishing yes/no allow, restrict or ban fishing (useful for marine reserve)
allow/restrict/ban:diving yes/no allow, restrict or ban diving (useful for marine reserve)
allow/restrict/ban:hunting yes/no allow, restrict or ban hunting animals
allow/restrict/ban:camping yes/no allow, restrict or ban to go camping
allow/restrict/ban:building yes/no allow, restrict or ban make buildings


Comments

  • I think this proposal is more general than yours and is sufficiently flexible for tagging the several types of natural protected areas. Please, comments allow. ;-)--Xan 08:39, 28 August 2010 (BST)
  • Perhaps it could be complement the boundary_protected_tag--Xan 08:45, 28 August 2010 (BST)

"boundary=protected_area" is there already

There's already Tag:boundary=protected_area which uses IUCN Protected Areas Categories System. I don't know much about the subject but it seems to be more completely.

Yes. I know. But many governments does not follow this standard I think and they get new "protected areas". Perhaps it's a complement of that--Xan 17:57, 28 August 2010 (BST)

Duplicates existing tag

The conservation=* (see Proposed features/conservation was proposed back in 2009 by Timbl (you may have heard of him), and as far as I see this key has a substantial overlap with what was suggested back then. SK53 (talk) 08:50, 23 April 2015 (UTC)